- 4 - (a) 85 percent of such excess, plus (b) the lesser of (i) one- half of the Social Security benefits received during the year, or (ii) one-half of the difference between the adjusted base amount and the base amount of the taxpayer, or (2) 85 percent of the Social Security benefits received during the year. Sec. 86(a)(2). The base amount and the adjusted base amount for the year at issue for a joint return are $32,000 and $44,000, respectively. Sec. 86(c)(1)(B) and (2)(B). Petitioners do not challenge respondent's computation under this formula that results in $4,679 of their Social Security benefits' being includable in gross income. Petitioners contend only that respondent never challenged their omission of such income on prior years' returns. The mere fact that omission of such income on petitioners' prior returns was never questioned by respondent is not a basis for the exclusion of such income on subsequent returns that are questioned by respondent. Each taxable year stands alone, and respondent may challenge in a succeeding year what was condoned or agreed to in a former year. Boatner v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-379 (citing Auto. Club v. Commissioner, 353 U.S. 180 (1957)), affd. 164 F.3d 629 (9th Cir. 1998). Respondent, therefore, is sustained in including the subject income on petitioners' 2000 return. As noted above, petitioners are entitled to a dependency exemption deduction for their son for the year at issue based on respondent's concession.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011